A sovereign citizen’s child abductor denounced a judge as a “talking parrot” and “master propagandist,” claiming she was a “living woman” and engaging in “rude and offensive behavior” until a judge charged her with contempt.
The woman’s wild antics were revealed in a damning judgment released last month by NSW District Court Judge Andrew Haesler after she pleaded not guilty to child abduction in August.
The woman’s chaotic trial in the Wollongong District Court was plagued by “rude and offensive” behavior towards prosecutors, court staff, witnesses, the judge and the jury – including attempts to approach a juror while her own son was giving evidence.
The behavior became so bad that Judge Haesler charged her with contempt of court and had her taken into custody before a guilty verdict was handed down.
The Crown alleged the woman – who cannot be identified – took her eight-year-old child from an emergency worker during an access visit to a Wollongong park.
It was alleged that she presented the case worker with a “declaration and notice” marked with her fingerprint for “identification” – claiming in the document that she was a “living being sovereign in this country” and “involved in the courts and their crowns (sic )’.
On the first day of the trial, she declined to enter a plea.
Instead, she responded only to “a living woman” or “(her name)… not her legal fictional name” and claimed she was a “living woman… not a legal name.”
A sovereign citizen’s child abductor denounced a judge as a “talking parrot” and “master propagandist,” claiming she was a “living woman” and engaging in “rude and offensive behavior” until a judge charged her with contempt (stock image)
At other times, she insulted Judge Haesler by calling him a “barking dog,” “talking parrot,” and “master propagandist,” and railed against him.
In considering her contempt, Judge Haesler stated, “Judges should not be thin-skinned.
‘Words are sometimes said in the heat of the moment. Words that are immediately regretted,” he wrote in the verdict.
‘Here the words were used deliberately. They didn’t regret it.’
Judge Haesler said he chose not to take the bait, calling the woman’s insults “pathetic and bathic.”
“Responding to them with violence or indignation would have added fuel to the fire,” he continued in the ruling.
“They did not undermine the integrity of the court as an institution. The jury saw through them. They were laughing at the suspect, not at the court.”
In line with her bizarre behavior, the woman asked inappropriate and ‘not allowed’ questions to witnesses called.
Each witness had to be asked to leave because she used their presence on the witness stand to “make assertions, statements and offensive comments,” Judge Haesler said.
This included the woman’s teenage son, whom she “slandered” as he tried to testify.
“If her son said something, she would talk over him,” the verdict states.
“At one point her son told her, ‘Just ask the questions, bro.’
Two of the woman’s adult children were called by the Crown, but an equipment malfunction forced the court to rely on the use of the prosecutor’s phone.
She then guided her adult son with “opinions that supported her actions” instead of asking questions.
The vexing exchange prompted Judge Haesler to declare, “Ladies and gentlemen, it is embarrassing. She is now having a private conversation with her son on the accuser’s phone… none of this is relevant.”
Judge Haesler said the woman then tried to approach the jury and asked if they could hear the conversation.
Despite his warnings, she continued, causing one juror to “cringe and look away” as security was called.
“She tried to leave the court, saying she couldn’t be there until the jury returned,” the verdict reads.
“I had the sheriffs stop her from leaving. She called the sheriffs ‘Ninja Turtles’ but eventually calmed down.”
The woman also wanted the proceedings to be stayed so that she could subpoena witnesses, despite the fact that the trial was nearing its end and had to be completed months in advance.
Her constant interruptions culminated in Judge Haesler arresting her and charging her with contempt of court.
Judge Andrew Haesler ordered the woman taken into custody and charged with contempt of court
Realizing this, the woman said, “Okay, okay. No, no, no. That’s not going to happen.
‘Looks like I’ve been arrested. I am being held,” she continued, according to the verdict.
‘I don’t give permission. I do not consent… to be held as a living woman who has come of age.”
As she was removed from the court, Judge Haesler addressed the jury.
‘I have certain powers. “I could have exercised them on Monday, but despite her own conduct, she is entitled to a fair trial,” he said.
Even after being charged with contempt of court, the woman did not give up.
She continued to accuse Judge Haesler of not treating her fairly during the trial and accused him of behaving “outrageously” after her arrest.
In her closing speech, the woman admitted she was “cheeky” as part of a “performance.”
“It was difficult to determine how intentional or contrived that act was, but her continued disobedience continued with her refusal to engage with me when she was charged and given details of the contempt,” Judge Haesler said in his ruling .
After a guilty verdict was returned, the woman took a parting shot at the jury: “Thanks guys. See you…next time you’re in trouble, I hope people stand up for you.’
She will be sentenced on December 18.
Judge Haesler’s judgment ends with a blunt assessment of the woman’s antics.
‘The woman chose to represent herself. (She) chose not to seek advice from lawyers or any guidance from me regarding the conduct of her trial,” the judgment said.
“She chose not to listen. She decided to hinder the process. She chose to proceed on the grounds that the laws of NSW did not apply to her.
“Her actions were deliberate and deliberate.
“She was, for all intents and purposes, ‘the author of her own misfortune.’
